Turbo vs NA Poll
06-17-2010, 08:22 PM
#76
Audi nearly went broke with warranty issues on the 2.7t motor, especially in the cramped S4 chassis. They went to supercharger because it was less end user tunable and had less "heat management" issues.
Now on topic. I would prefer a turbo over a N/A simply for efficientcy sake. A turbo motor that puts out the same power as a N/A motor can consume far less fuel on a daily basis.
What you need to realize is that "boost" is essentially creating "discplacement". If you are measuring it as the amount of air/fuel you can cram into a space and blow up. Forced induction does just that, it creates the same power of larger displacement by forcing in more.
So to use the 944/951 as the perfect example of this. When just cruising down the road off boost the 951 consumes just like a 944......but when you want the rush of a bigger motor you get it. Just toss in some boost and get the power you want.....and the fuel consumption of the bigger motor to go with it at that point
In most cases to get a NA to produce the power of a similar turbo motor you have go compromise. You give up fuel mileage, get big Lumpy cams, make them super high revving, etc.
02-18-2012, 11:40 AM
#77
Team Owner
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: one thousand, five hundred miles north of Ft. Lauderdale for the summer.
Posts: 28,705
Received 212 Likes
on
153 Posts
V8 chevy 944/968 or your n/a 968 (or my n/a 968) !!
btw, where's the actual poll for this thread ? feeling a bit gypped here...
overkill ? or the 3,317 no start/dead engine threads from those (dearly departed souls) that came before....
